Examiners’ Report 

June 2018  

GCSE History 1HI0 10  

 
Edexcel and BTEC Qualifications 
Edexcel and BTEC qualifications come from Pearson, the UK’s largest awarding body. We provide a 
wide range of qualifications including academic, vocational, occupational and specific programmes 
for employers. For further information visit our qualifications websites at ​www.edexcel.com o
​ r 
www.btec.co.uk​.  
 Alternatively, you can get in touch with us using the details on our contact us page at 
www.edexcel.com/contactus​.  

Giving you insight to inform next steps  

ResultsPlus is Pearson’s free online service giving instant and detailed analysis of your students’ 
exam results.  

See students’ scores for every exam question.  

Understand how your students’ performance compares with class and national averages.  

Identify potential topics, skills and types of question where students may need to develop their 
learning further.  

For more information on ResultsPlus, or to log in, visit ​www.edexcel.com/resultsplus​. Your 

exams officer will be able to set up your ResultsPlus account in minutes via Edexcel Online.  

Pearson: helping people progress, everywhere  

Pearson aspires to be the world’s leading learning company. Our aim is to help everyone progress 
in their lives through education. We believe in every kind of learning, for all kinds of people, 
wherever they are in the world. We’ve been involved in education for over 150 years, and by 
working across 70 countries, in 100 languages, we have built an international reputation for our 
commitment to high standards and raising achievement through innovation in education. Find out 
more about how we can help you and your students at: ​www.pearson.com/uk​.  

June 2018  
Publications Code 1HI0_10_1806_ER  

All the material in this publication is copyright  

© Pearson Education Ltd 2018  

Introduction  
Most candidates seemed well prepared for the range of topics and question styles in this 
examination.  

The Historic Environment seems to have engaged candidates’ interest and generally they 
responded well to the questions but some candidates found it difficult to apply the skills they had 
learned to these specific sources. In Question 2(a), many candidates were trapped in Level 2 
because they focused on the source content, did not include contextual knowledge or offered 
simplistic comments on the provenance. Many candidates had a checklist of aspects to consider 
about the provenance but they often did not properly apply these ideas to the individual sources. 
Question 2(b) seems to have been the question they found most challenging and a number of 
2 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  
candidates did not gain the full four marks because they did not recognise the precise nature of, 
and the different responses needed for the sub-questions.  

The Thematic Study focuses on change and continuity over time and therefore candidates need a 
good understanding of chronology and a clear understanding of the key themes and the factors 
involved. Candidates also need a clear understanding of the differences between key themes such 
as retribution, deterrence, reform and rehabilitation, the nature of crime, punishment and law 
enforcement.  

In question 4, the focus will always be on causation but the question does not require a judgement 
to be made or for the answer to prioritise or show interaction of factors. Many excellent answers 
provided a well-argued response but no marks were available to reward this evaluation.  

In questions 4, 5 and 6 the stimulus points in the question will often be useful reminders to 
candidates of the two sides of the issue or the chronological range covered in the question, 
although they will not necessarily be presented in chronological order. It should also be noted that 
the stimulus points will usually relate to aspects of content rather than directly indicating a factor 
that should be included. Candidates do not need to use these stimulus points but there is an 
expectation that there will be both depth and breadth of knowledge, shown by three discrete 
aspects of the question being covered, although this does not mean candidates need to identify 
three different causes or events. It was pleasing to see that candidates had understood this 
expectation and most answers were clearly structured in paragraphs, making it easy for the 
examiner to identify the different aspects being covered.  

‘Breadth’ can be shown through coverage of the period. Unless there is a specific date that is 
significant, the questions are based around the chronological divisions in the specification, so it is 
acceptable that answers will sometimes focus on a section of the period in the question but there 
should be sufficient breadth to show knowledge of the wider context. A question on change or 
whether an event was significant or a turning point, needs the event to be placed in the context of 
the situation both before and afterwards. ‘Depth’ of knowledge is shown by the specific details that 
are included in the answer.  

It is important that candidates have a secure sense of chronology and can recognise the periods 
named in the question – these are usually the terms used in the specification. Terms such as 
‘during the years’, ‘since 1900’, or ‘in the nineteenth century’, give a clear timescale for their answer 
and candidates should note these parameters. If the question asks about the nineteenth century, 
an answer based on the 1900s is likely to score 0.  

In questions 5 and 6 the focus can be on any of the second order concepts: causation, change, 
continuity, consequence, significance and similarity/difference and these questions also require 
evaluation and a judgement. Many answers remained at Level 3, despite excellent knowledge, 
because they missed the focus of the question. In a number of cases, candidates responded to the 
topic rather than the key idea, for example producing an answer generally on prison reform in 
question 6 rather than addressing the focus on the significance of Pentonville as a turning point. 
Candidates who reached Level 4 realised that the topic provides the context but that there is a 
specific focus on which a judgement should be offered.  

Examiners felt that candidates had been particularly well prepared for the extended writing 
questions. They noted the use of analytical language, for example, ‘a major breakthrough’, ‘this 
revolutionised law enforcement’, ‘this prevented progress’ and the structure within paragraphs to 
make a point, provide the evidence, explain how the evidence proves the point and then link it back 
to the question. 

GCSE History 1HI0 10 3

​   
Similarly, it was pleasing to see how many answers were clearly structured to consider both sides 
of the issue but sometimes other structures may be more appropriate. Although the question asks 
how far the candidate agrees, the answer should also take account of the second order concept 
being assessed, for example, structuring the answer to look at different aspects of change and 
continuity or of significance. Many answers remained at Level 3 because the judgement tended to 
be simply a summary of the two sides of the issue and the decision that the statement was 
 ‘somewhat’ true. At Level 4, there should be a sense of evaluation, recognising nuances of partial 
agreement and showing which evidence carries most weight. Answers should also show what 
criteria are being applied. For example, a judgement on significance could be based on the number 
of people affected, the length of time that the effects were felt, the groups affected (the social 
groups, villages or towns, law enforcement or criminals) or how wide-ranging the secondary effects 
were. Ideally, this will create a sense of argument running throughout the answer and the more 
able answers often had plans, showing that the argument was thought through before writing 
began.  

Examiners reported that there were a number of excellent answers, with truly impressive 
knowledge and thoughtful analysis and evaluation. It was also noticeable that many of the more 
able answers were relatively concise, demonstrating a very focused approach and clear structure.  

If extra paper is taken, candidates should clearly signal that the answer is continued elsewhere – 
preferably on an additional sheet or the back page of the booklet rather than elsewhere in the 
paper, since it is difficult to match up asterisks to comments which appear at the end of another 
question. However, in many cases where additional paper had been taken, the marks had already 
been attained within the space provided rather than on the extra paper and candidates should be 
discouraged from assuming that lengthy answers will automatically score highly. Indeed, 
candidates taking extra paper often ran out of time on the final, high mark question and therefore 
disadvantaged themselves. There were also some completely blank answers to the final question, 
suggesting that time management was a problem for some candidates.  

Spelling, punctuation and grammar were broadly accurate and many answers used specialist terms 
with confidence but examiners reported that a poor standard of handwriting made a number of 
answers difficult to mark and exacerbated the difficulty in understanding a badly-expressed 
answer.  

The SPaGST marks may be affected if there are weaknesses in these areas:  

appropriate use of capital letters. correct use of apostrophes. weak grammar ('would of') 

and casual language, which is not appropriate in an examination.  

paragraphs: not structuring answers in paragraphs not only affects the SPaGST marks but may 
also make it difficult for the examiner to identify whether three different aspects have been 
covered.  

Examiners commented that a number of well-prepared candidates demonstrated excellent 

knowledge being deployed to support thoughtful analysis and evaluation; such answers were a 
pleasure to mark. They also noted that candidates seemed very prepared for the 12 and 16 mark 
questions, with most answers having a clear structure and good use of specialist terms. 

4 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

Question 1   
Candidates need to be clear that the feature identified should be something characteristic of the 
topic and that having identified a feature, they should add further detail which will explain the 
feature or provide context. Many candidates easily scored the full four marks in four sentences but 
others struggled to identify and support two separate features of life in a workhouse or wrote 
excessive amounts, which was not always fully relevant. Some candidates did not seem to 
understand that two marks are available for each feature – one for identifying the feature and one 
for additional information about the identified feature; answers which listed four features or 
disconnected points of separate information were limited to a maximum of two marks. If the 
answer consisted of just one sentence it was sometimes hard to distinguish if additional detail had 
been provided. There were also a number of answers which tried to use the same point as two 
separate features, for example claiming that workhouses were dirty and unhygienic and then 
claiming that disease was common as a result of conditions in the workhouse.  

It was disappointing to see how many candidates could not provide accurate detail about the 
workhouses in Whitechapel. This topic is explicitly named in the specification yet large numbers of 
candidates talked about low wages and dangerous machinery. Some answers also included 
references to rent, presumably confusing workhouses with lodging houses. Other comments about 
overcrowding, hygiene and disease, could have been made about any area of Whitechapel and 
were not a specific feature of life in the workhouse – indeed, cleaning was one of the regular tasks 
of workhouse inhabitants.  

Some candidates tried to use details from Source B to answer this question, not realising that a 
workshop was not the same as a workhouse. A surprising number of answers were left blank.  

When candidates were knowledgeable, they usually explained that families were divided, that 
uniforms were worn, that tasks included picking oakum or needlework, food was poor quality and 
that life was intentionally made unpleasant in order to discourage people from seeking refuge in 
the workhouse. A small number of candidates were very knowledgeable about the casual ward or 
specific workhouses, mentioning the Whitechapel workhouse and also South Grove. 

GCSE History 1HI0 10 5

​   
  
The answer clearly identifies two features of the Whitechapel workhouses:  
the use of hard 
labour and the strict 
rules, including the separation of  
families.  

Try to write two 

sentences for each feature – identify the feature in one  
sentence and provide some additional 
detail in the other. 

6 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

  
It is important that the features identified are specific to the workhouse and 
not simply typical of Whitechapel. Here, the spread of disease is linked to the 
fact that the workhouse was crowded and many people would be ill so   
disease would spread quickly. 

GCSE History 1HI0 10 7

​   
  

An answer that continues beyond the lines may be wasting time – often the 
answer has already scored the full 4 marks and sometimes the extra detail is 
straying from the question 
focus. 

8 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

Question 2 (a)   
The evaluation of sources is a key skill in History and most candidates understand that aspects of 
the provenance can affect the usefulness of the content yet candidates often approach it in a 
formulaic way, working through a mnemonic involving a checklist of points but offering generic 
comments, without really applying these ideas to the specific sources. The mark scheme includes 
three strands within Assessment Objective 3: the usefulness of the source content; the effect of the 
provenance and the inclusion of relevant contextual knowledge. These strands are presented as a 
single bullet point, showing that they are inter-related, therefore an approach which covers each 
element separately, is unlikely to reach high marks.  

It is important to note that the question asks about the usefulness of a source for a specific 
enquiry, in this case, the problems facing immigrants, and therefore any comments about the 
content of the source must show how the details of the source could be used by the historian in 
this enquiry. Simple comprehension – it states, it shows – based on the assumption that such 
information is useful, remains low level. Developed statements about the usefulness of the content 
can reach Level 2 but answers consisting solely of such comments are unlikely to progress beyond 
mid-Level 2, irrespective of the length of the answer, because the other strands of the Assessment 
Objective have not been addressed.  

Source A produced a range of interpretations, with some candidates explaining how the illustration 
of a shelter for Russian Jews showed that immigrants needed support whereas others thought the 
men in the illustration looked well dressed and well fed.  

The content of Source B led to many comments about the poor working and living conditions, the 
starvation wages and the polluted air and candidates reached Level 2 fairly easily but it was 
disappointing to see some excellent answers on how this content was useful in an enquiry about 
the problems facing immigrants, not reaching Level 3.  

All the sources in this examination will always be primary sources and the assumption that a source 
is useful or reliable because it was contemporary, will remain at Level 1. Similarly, comments about 
a source being biased or exaggerated can only be rewarded when they are supported by specific 
examples from the source, demonstrating that bias or exaggeration.  

The statement that the purpose of a source was to inform is again very generalised; when 
discussing purpose there needs to be some consideration of the intended audience and effect. 
Similarly, the assumption that a source is automatically reliable or unreliable because of its nature, 
does not demonstrate an engagement with the specific sources being assessed. Very few answers 
made use of the source content to assess reliability or explained why a source’s reliability made it 
more, or less, useful.  

It is not necessary to cover every aspect of the provenance (nature, origin and purpose) but it is 
important to explain how aspects of the provenance affect the usefulness of the source – ways in 
which they strengthen or limit the usefulness of the source.  

Candidates seemed to find it more difficult to use visual sources than written ones, both in terms of 
how the content could be used by the historian and in terms of assessing how far the provenance 
affects the value of that source. It was disappointing to see how many candidates dismissed Source 
A because it was an illustration from a magazine and was therefore exaggerated because it was 
intended to entertain, or it was unreliable because it was only from one person’s perspective. 
Interestingly, some candidates though it portrayed such a positive image that it was intended as 
propaganda to increase immigration, while others thought it was intended to increase 
antiSemitism. Frequently there was little discussion of the source content and its usefulness for this 
enquiry. 

GCSE History 1HI0 10 9

​   
 The comments on Source B were more thoughtful as candidates usually explained that an 
inspector would be expected to investigate conditions and make an accurate report. Some 
candidates dismissed the report as biased because the language used showed the inspector’s 
attitude but more able answers could explain that the strength of his feelings was valuable to the 
historian since he would have seen other workshops and therefore this was clearly worse than 
many others.  

Many answers were trapped in Level 2 because they did not include contextual knowledge but it 
should be noted that there are no marks for providing contextual detail without relating it to the 
usefulness of the source. There were also some answers which offered detailed knowledge about 
why Russian Jews immigrated, not recognising that the focus of the enquiry in the question was 
about the problems facing them. Candidates can reasonably be expected to have contextual 
knowledge about the situation of immigrants in Whitechapel since this is listed in the specification. 
They should be able use this knowledge to show the significance of the information in a source or 
to show whether the situation in a source is typical of the wider context and therefore assess the 
usefulness of the source content. It might also be used in relation to the source’s origins, for 
example to show that the author was in a position to have accurate knowledge, or to discuss 
circumstances, for example ‘the increase in Jewish immigration during the 1880s and the tendency 
towards segregation’ could have been used to explain why Source A shows a refuge specifically for 
Jewish immigrants or to give examples of Jewish immigrants who set up local businesses then 
provided support for new immigrants.  

The focus should be on assessing what is in the source rather than listing details which are not 
mentioned. Candidates should recognise that the sources were not produced in order to be used 
by historians and they cannot cover every detail that might be useful in an investigation. If the 
answer identifies omissions from the source as limitations on its usefulness, there should be an 
explanation of why these details could have been expected. Candidates should also recognise that 
it is not enough to repeat a detail from the source and assert that this can be confirmed from the 
candidate’s own knowledge – some additional detail is needed as a demonstration of that own 
knowledge.  

The statement that Source A only showed us the situation of Jewish immigrants is a low level 
comment unless it is accompanied by own knowledge to show that other immigrants’ experiences 
were different. This was a shelter for Jewish immigrants and therefore it would not be expected to 
show the situation of Irish immigrants. Similarly, the comment that Source B only gives us details 
about one workshop is also low level unless it is accompanied by own knowledge to suggest that 
most workshops were different.  

There were very few answers which covered only one of the sources; these were necessarily limited 
to low marks since every level of the mark scheme refers to ‘sources’. Source B was usually 
evaluated better than Source A but the majority of marks were in Level 2. Few answers covered all 
three strands of the mark scheme but those that did, presented them as three separate points. The 
focus of Level 3 is showing how some aspects of provenance and of contextual knowledge affect 
the source’s usefulness for the stated enquiry. It was interesting to see that practically all the 
answers which needed extra paper focused on covering the source content in detail and remained 
in Level 2, while Level 3 answers were often more concise and focused on the issue of how useful 
the information was in the light of contextual knowledge and aspects of provenance.  

The question asks ‘how useful’ the sources are, so a judgement should be made on the usefulness 
of the evidence in each source, weighing up its strengths and weaknesses. However, it should be 
noted that identifying weaknesses is not the same as listing limitations in the content coverage or 
asserting that a source is limited because it is biased. 

10 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

Answers reached Level 3 by assessing the usefulness of the content in the light of the provenance 
and the candidate’s own knowledge; the criteria used to make the judgement could be its accuracy 
(this is not the same as reliability), the relevance of the source, the way it could be used by the 
historian, how representative the source is etc. An evaluation of a source’s utility should be explicit 
about the criteria being used, for example an answer should be able to explain that while the 
language may be emotive, the facts included can be supported from the candidate’s own 
knowledge so the source is very useful despite any loaded language. Similarly, the answer might 
show an awareness of the different uses of a source for this enquiry: a report might be an accurate 
depiction of one workshop but its factual usefulness may be less than its usefulness in indicating 
the attitude or priorities of the government.  

Although a judgement should be reached on the overall usefulness of each source, there is no 
requirement to compare the sources or to use them in combination and no marks are available for 
this. Candidates who treated each source separately were most likely to reach Level 3. 

GCSE History 1HI0 10 1

​ 1  
12 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10 
GCSE History 1HI0 10 1
​ 3 
  

The answer clearly focuses on the usefulness of the source content for an 
enquiry about the problems facing immigrants. The effect of contextual 
knowledge and aspects of provenance and reliability on the accuracy and 
usefulness of the content are considered.  

Make sure you show how your contextual knowledge and aspects of 
the
provenance affect the usefulness of the source. 

14 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

GCSE History 1HI0 10 1
​ 5 
  
This answer does focus on the usefulness of the source content but the   
comments about provenance and reliability are undeveloped. It says Source 
A may be biased but does not offer any evidence from the source to support 
that beyond the comment that it ‘only shows stereotypical Jews’. It repeats   
details from Source B but without showing whether they can be taken at face 
value or why these details are useful.  

Only say a source is biased or exaggerated if you can provide the evidence  
from the source. 

16 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

Question 2 (b)   
This was an unfamiliar question style and while many candidates gained the full four marks, some 
candidates found it difficult to present their answers clearly. Unfortunately, some candidates wrote 
about the wrong source and therefore scored 0.  

The whole question should be treated as a package linked to the enquiry that was identified in 
question 2(a) (the problems facing immigrants) and the aim is for candidates to show that they 
know how historians work. The first sub-question simply asks them to identify a detail from the 
source – this is most easily done by quoting a phrase from the source. However, candidates do 
need to identify a specific detail; generalised comments such as ‘conditions in the workshop’ are 
not referring to details and are not precise enough to be rewarded. Also, the detail needs to be 
from the source and not from the provenance.  

The next section is linked to this detail – candidates need to state the question they would ask to 
follow up this detail in relation to the overall enquiry and consequently, the question should be 
broader than following up one individual’s experiences. The mark scheme states ‘Award 1 mark for 
selecting a detail that could form the basis of a follow-up enquiry and 1 mark for a question which 
is linked to it’, so this means that no marks can be given if the candidate’s question is not linked to 
the detail identified or does not relate to the overall enquiry. A number of candidates did not 
identify a detail but wrote a question, which they then repeated in the second section.  

The most commonly asked questions were about the ‘starvation wages’, the families being 
imprisoned and living in the same room, and the comment about dangerous fumes in the room. 
Some questions were unsuitable, for example why the workshop in Source B was a danger to the 
community – this is not clearly linked to the enquiry focus on the problems facing immigrants and 
this then made it difficult for marks to be awarded in the next two sub-questions.  

The third and fourth sub-questions ask candidates to identify a source where they could find 
information to answer the question they have just posed. Candidates need to be clear that this 
must be a specific primary source – history books, the internet, documentaries were all unsuitable 
answers. Instead, it would be more appropriate if they tried to think about the sources consulted 
by the writers of history books, internet articles or documentaries.  

While it is recognised that candidates cannot have detailed knowledge of all possible sources, the 
specification states that candidates should be aware of the types of sources available and the 
nature of the information they contain. Answers such as ‘the National Archives’ or ‘official records’ 
are too generalised to be rewarded. In some cases, where a generalised source was named in sub 
question three, a mark could be awarded because the explanation made it clear what sort of 
information might be located in those records and how that information would help the historian 
with the overall enquiry but if the explanation is not clear, then marks cannot be awarded for either 
of these sub-questions.  

If a diary or photograph is suggested as a potential source, it should be as specific as possible, 

including the possible author (for example a workshop owner), the date and place – for example, 
the diary of a workshop owner in the East End of London, from 1870-1900 when many immigrants 
arrived. However, a diary or photograph can only offer a single view and candidates should think 
carefully about whether that is an appropriate source for their wider enquiry. Some of the 
suggested sources were unrealistic – immigrants who were treated as prisoners were unlikely to be 
recorded in a census, Booth’s maps did not record details of ethnicity, and few of the immigrants 
would be likely to write letters or diary entries providing the details that the candidate sought and it 
would not be possible to interview an immigrant from that period. 

GCSE History 1HI0 10 1

​ 7  
Where possible, credit was given but the explanation was again important – comments such as ‘this 
 would help me to find out what I want to know’ or ‘because this source would be true’ could not be 
rewarded and sometimes meant the source also could not be rewarded. An explanation of the sort   
of information that the source might contain and how it would be used to answer the candidate’s 
question could sometimes be used to validate the suggested source. For example, it would be valid 
to suggest that employers would have some records showing the number of their workers who 
lived and worked in the workshop and therefore a statistical analysis could be done to show the 
frequency of such treatment but the simple statement that employer records would have details of 
the immigrants and their problems is not precise enough to be rewarded. Some answers suggested 
Source A or another report as a potential source without being able to clearly explain how that 
would help to answer their proposed question.  

Success in this question depended on the selection of an appropriate question in the first part of 
the answer, a question which broadened from that detail to the wider enquiry and then a well 
explained suggested source. When multiple suggestions had been given to a sub-question, it was 
often counter-productive. Offering more than one detail or question meant that the follow-up 
sections were often not clearly linked, while offering multiple sources meant that the explanation in 
the final section was usually invalid.  

In general, the simple approach was the most effective. Questions about starvation wages could be 
followed up by checking employers’ financial records or the census was suggested as a way of 
checking where immigrants were living whereas attempts to follow up on the dangerous conditions 
tended to be too generalised – checking would not really provide the necessary information. It was 
also important that candidates treated this question as a package and thought about the follow-up 
question and the source to be consulted before writing the answer to the first sub-question. 

18 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

GCSE History 1HI0 10 1
​ 9 

The question is clearly prompted by a detail from the source and relates to 
the wider enquiry in the question. The explanation of the source that could 
be consulted is clear, showing what information might be found and how that 
 would help to answer the question. Although this level of detail might not be 
included in the census return, it is a reasonable suggestion, based on 
knowledge of the nature of sources available from this period.  

These sub-questions show that you understand how sources are used in an 
enquiry. 

20 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

GCSE History 1HI0 10 2
​ 1 

The answer does not identify a detail from the source and the question asked 
is not related to the problems the immigrants faced. The suggested source is 
too vague and the explanation of why it should be consulted does not explain 
how that source would help to answer the candidate’s question.  
  

Try to name a specific type of source and then explain what information you 

would hope to find and how it would answer your question. 

22 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

Question 3   
Most candidates found this question straightforward. They could identify a difference in 
the nature of punishment by describing the move from retribution to reform in the 
purpose of punishment or the change from physical, harsh punishment to 
punishments such as prison and fines. They could also provide examples from each of 
the periods to demonstrate that difference.  

Some candidates wrote about the use of the death penalty but the abolition of capital 
punishment is not, in itself, a change in the nature of punishment. Where answers 
brought in examples from the USA, these details could not be rewarded, since this 
Thematic Study is about Britain. It should also be noted that trial by ordeal was not a 
punishment and changes in law enforcement or policing were also not relevant.  

In some cases the difference was not clearly identified, with details from the two periods 
simply being juxtaposed. In other cases, the supporting information was unbalanced, 
describing the situation in one period and simply stating that it was different in the 
other period, or the information given was out of period. Some answers offered a range 
of points about each period but these were not linked and therefore they merely 
offered information about the two periods rather than identifying a difference. The 
answer does need to explicitly identify the difference and then offer evidence from 
both periods to provide support.  

While the majority of candidates scored the full four marks, some wrote far too much; 
there are only two marks available for the supporting detail from each period. 

GCSE History 1HI0 10 2

​ 3  

This answer starts with detail from one period, then explains how this is 
different from the earlier period and provides detail from that time. Overall, it 
identifies a difference in the purpose and the nature of punishment during 
the two periods.  

It is a good idea to state the difference at the start of the answer and 
 then
provide the supporting detail from each period. 

24 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

  

This answer is confused: tithings and hue and cry were not forms of   
punishment and the reference to policing c1900-present is also irrelevant.   
Wergild was a punishment but not relevant for the period in the question. The  
comment that punishments were getting harsher is not a valid difference   
between the two periods but possibly refers to change during the years   
c1500-c1700. Similarly, the comment that punishments were getting more   
lenient may refer to changes during the years c1900-present. The difference  
has not been clearly identified and most of the detail is irrelevant; the only   
point that can be rewarded is that capital punishment was abolished in the  
later period.  

Remember to provide supporting 

detail from each period. 

GCSE History 1HI0 10 2

​ 5  
 Question 4   
Most candidates could write confidently about crimes against authority and many could explain 
why the definition of such crimes changed during this period and new definitions were introduced. 
The stimulus point ‘poaching’ usually led into an explanation of William I’s introduction of Forest 
Laws, with a number of answers explaining the Norman desire to assert authority over the 
conquered land. Poaching was also explained as a more general crime against authority in terms of 
trespass but references to the Black Acts in 1723 were out of period.  

There were a number of answers which made good use of contextual knowledge, for example in 
linking the context of the Norman Conquest and fear of rebellion to the idea of murdrum. Henry 
VIII’s assumption of religious supremacy and the frequent changes of religion were also well used to 
explain the new definition of heresy as a crime. However, in some cases the focus on causation was 
missed and instead of an explanation of why certain actions were redefined as a crime against 
authority, the answer became a description of crimes against authority, for example a description 
of the Gunpowder Plot or changed attitudes towards witchcraft. A number of candidates seemed to 
be confused about heresy and treason, defining heresy as rebelling against the king. Answers about 
vagabonds were less common but they were usually well done. Smuggling was a valid example but 
the answer needed to be read carefully to ensure it was within the period in the question – 
comments about the Hawkhurst gang were not valid.  

Examiners commented how pleasant it was to be able to award full marks to a number of answers. 
These answers tended to focus on the changes in circumstances as a reason why crimes against 
authority were redefined and then provide supporting examples. Some answers included 
knowledgeable explanations of the authority of the monarch, Church and landowners and 
examiners commented on impressive knowledge of the extent of William I’s forests, the terms of 
his Forest Laws, the religious changes in the Tudor period and the numbers of executions for 
heresy. Some candidates tried to structure their answer around various factors such as the role of 
individuals, or technology but these were less successful. Examiners also noted that some Level 3 
answers contained more detailed information than many Level 4 answers but they stayed at Level 
3 because the analysis was not developed.  

Less  able  answers  used  examples  that  were outside the timeframe of the question or simply wrote 

about  changing  definitions  of  crime  rather  than  crimes  against authority. Some candidates treated 
the stimulus material as key points in the answer, trying to explain that poaching was a reason why   
there were changes in the definition of crimes against authority rather than using poaching as an 
example showing how legal changes were made to protect the rights of the elite. Other answers 
drifted away from the focus of the question and discussed poaching and smuggling as social 
crimes. 

26 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

GCSE History 1HI0 10 2
​ 7 
28 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10 
  
This answer covers 
three aspects of new 
definitions of crimes against  
authority. In each case it identifies what changed and gives a reason why that 
change happened. It 
scored full marks.  

Make sure you 

focus on the specific question – this is asking why change  
happened so focus on the reasons for change, don’t just describe the change. 
GCSE History 1HI0 10 2
​ 9  
30 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10 
  
This answer does identify three aspects of new definitions of crimes against 

authority but it does not offer much supporting detail.  

You need to include specific detail to support the points that you are 

making.​Question 5   
This was the less popular choice and that perhaps reflected the fact that candidates seemed 
insecure in certain aspects of knowledge.  

The work of the Fielding brothers in developing the Bow Street Runners was usually fairly well 
known and many answers identified the significance of this work as the first attempt to set up a 
professional force. Few answers went beyond the Bow Street Runners, to discuss the importance of 
their work in keeping records, the publication of The Public Hue and Cry or the work of the Horse 
Patrol or identified any problems with the Bow Street Runners, for example, the limited 
geographical coverage.  

Examiners commented that confused knowledge of chronology limited many answers. Most 
candidates could link the Bow Street Runners to the establishment of the Metropolitan Police and 
use this to evaluate importance of the work of the Fielding's but a surprising number found it 
difficult to make use of the ‘town watchmen’ stimulus point and many confused them with early 
constables. Candidates do not need to use the stimulus points and for some, it would have been 
better to ignore this one. It could have been used to discuss the weaknesses in law enforcement 
before the Fielding's and how ineffective the system was in the context of industrial towns but 
many candidates appeared to think the Fielding's introduced watchmen. Additional points could   

GCSE History 1HI0 10 3

​ 1  
have been a discussion of thief-takers or the expansion of the Metropolitan Police to a national 
 body.  

The focus of this question was change and continuity – whether the Fieldings’ work led to 
improvement, and this meant that a chronological approach was often the most successful. A 
number of more able answers identified the Fieldings’ work as a turning point, moving away from 
community based law enforcement and towards an organised, professional police force.  

However, many candidates approached this question as if it asked ‘what was the greatest 
improvement in law enforcement’. It was possible to see the relevance of a discussion of Peel’s 
creation of a police force in showing that the Fieldings’ work was not a major improvement but in 
many cases the judgement offered in the conclusion made it clear that the answer was not 
evaluating the work of the Fielding's. Where the answer discussed the use of transportation or 
prison reform, the relevance to the question was less clear.  

Most answers offered a conclusion but it was often simply a restatement of what had already been 
said. However, it was pleasing to see answers at Level 4, with a sense of an argument and 
evaluation developing consistently throughout the answer and then in the conclusion, explicit 
criteria being applied to explain the final judgement. 

32 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

GCSE History 1HI0 10 3
​ 3 
  
This was a well-structured answer, placing the work of the Fielding brothers 
securely in context and showing how the Bow Street Runners were an   
improvement on the system of town watchmen and laid the foundations for 
the development of the police force. There was a good range of specific detail 
included and the line of argument builds to a consistent judgement. 

34 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

  

Have a clear line of argument running all the way through your answer 
– make sure it is consistent. 

GCSE History 1HI0 10 3

​ 5  
36 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10 
  
There are some good points in the conclusion to this answer but much of the 
detail is presented as description. There is relatively little about the work of 
the Fielding brothers and it is confused about town watchmen.  

Do not try to use a stimulus point if you don’t know anything about it; think of 
an alternative 
point from your own knowledge. 

Question 6   
Pentonville prison is named as a case study in the specification and generally candidates could 
describe the intention of reform, the use of the separate system and its consequences for the 
mental health of the prisoners. Examiners commented on the impressive detail included in some 
answers, included statistics on mental health issues. However, a surprising number of answers 
became confused about the term ‘separate system’ and explained it in terms of the reforms of 
Howard, where genders and classes of criminals were separated. Similarly, open prisons were 
assumed to be prisons before the reforms of Howard and Fry, where debtors and those awaiting 
trial mingled in large cells. Candidates do not need to use the stimulus points and for some, it 
would have been better to ignore this one.  

The idea of a turning point is explicitly stated in the specification but many answers did not address 
it. Answers needed a secure sense of chronology to place Pentonville in context; unfortunately, a 
large number of answers remained at Level 3 even though they contained an excellent section on 
Pentonville because they were unable to place this in the context of prisons before and afterwards. 
In some cases, candidates thought Howard and Fry suggested reforms after Pentonville. Most 
answers remained rooted in the 19th century and did not go beyond it.  

GCSE History 1HI0 10 3

​ 7  
Some candidates treated this as if the question asked ‘what was the biggest turning point in the use 
of prisons’. It was possible to consider alternative aspects of the use of prisons, for example the 
 reforms of Howard and Fry, or the development of borstals or open prisons and show how they 
provided foundations for the approach used in Pentonville or moved away from it, but answers 
which focused on alternative developments in the use of prisons or alternative punishments such 
as transportation, missed the focus in the question on the significance of Pentonville.  

Where answers were based on a secure sense of chronology, there were a number of thoughtful 
criteria being used. Many suggested that Pentonville was not significant because the shift to reform 
had already been initiated by Howard and Fry, whereas others suggested it was not significant 
because the separate system was abandoned, shown by the use of open prisons in the twentieth 
century. Others said that Pentonville was a significant staging point in a programme of reform, that 
it was significant because so many other prisons were built using it as a model, or that it was 
significant because it showed the government’s commitment to prison reform.  

Most answers offered a conclusion but it was often simply a restatement of what had already been 
said. However, it was pleasing to see answers at Level 4, with a sense of an argument and 
evaluation developing consistently throughout the answer and then in the conclusion, explicit 
criteria being applied to explain the final judgement. 

38 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

GCSE History 1HI0 10 3
​ 9 
40 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10 
GCSE History 1HI0 10 4
​ 1 
42 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10 
  

There  is  a  good  focus  on  the  significance  of  Pentonville  prison,  placing  it 
securely  in  context  in  order  to  show  its  impact  and  to  offer  a  judgement 

about whether it was a turning point in the use of prisons. 

The fact that the question asks for a judgement on whether Pentonville was a 
turning point is a signpost, telling you to examine the situation before and 
after its establishment in order to make your judgement.  
GCSE History 1HI0 10 4
​ 3  
44 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10 
GCSE History 1HI0 10 4
​ 5 
  

This answer has excellent detail about Pentonville prison and also a good 
range of detail on the reforms of Howard, Fry and Peel. However, the 
conclusion suggests a focus on evaluating the importance of various 
reformers rather than whether Pentonville was a turning point.  

For a ‘turning point’ question, a chronological structure can help to make 

your argument clearer. 

46 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  

Paper Summary  
Based on their performance on this paper, candidates are offered the following advice:  

They need a secure understanding of the chronological periods and terms used in the specification 
as well as the term ‘century’.  

They need to understand the themes within the specification.  

To reach the highest level they need to focus on the specific question being asked and deploy 
precise detail.  

It is not necessary to use the stimulus points in the question and candidates should not attempt to 
do so if they do not recognise them; however, candidates should aim to cover three separate 
aspects of the question.  

While there is good knowledge of some topics, candidates cannot rely on knowing just a few key 
topics and hoping to use that information in whatever question is asked. 
 GCSE History 1HI0 10 4
​ 7  
Grade Boundaries  
Grade boundaries for this, and all other papers, can be found on the website on this 

link: ​http://www.edexcel.com/iwantto/Pages/grade-boundaries.aspx 
 48 ​GCSE History 1HI0 10  
GCSE History 1HI0 10 5
​ 1  
Pearson Education Limited. Registered company number 872828   
with its registered office at 80 Strand, London WC2R 0RL.  

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)